It's probably a good idea to leave it alone. To me it's a jerk off move that would create enemies for no reason. It would not help the blurt price and hurt this chain's rep among the broader crypto community. Blurt still has important ties with HIVE via the HIVE/BLURT LP pool and it's best to avoid accidentally stepping on any whale toes.
Inactive stake gets slowly diluted out through inflation anyways. Yes it's a slow process but it's the most fair process.
Ok, thanks for the insight! Why doesn't the burn affect the price?
You missed my long response to you below. Here it is again:
The tokens that would be deleted are not in circulation. By very definition, they are not being used, and expected to NEVER be used. That means they are not available on the market, and not impacting prices. I don't believe deleting tokens that will never be used can have any effect on the price.
Perhaps deleting tokens that ARE in use, like on exchanges, being used in trades, or sitting liquid in a whale's account, would have an effect on the price. This assumption is the basis of the push to send HIVE tokens to the "null" account to be deleted. There have been numerous campaigns and requests and incentives to get users to delete their own funds, promising them an increase in the value of their remaining tokens. I have yet to see this really pan out. Doing that with tokens that aren't even part of the ecosystem and not on the market in any way is certainly not going to have any positive effect.
Ok, I understand 👍
bingo